They went in without a care for the law or the disdain of the outside world. They attacked violently, burning and invading, only concerned with what they could acquire. Innocent people died and the fires flamed for days. Yes, the invasion of Iraq was a prime example of neo-imperialist looting. This scenario uses what I call 'Left Switch', which I deployed in my poem 'Them Blue Ooligans' depicted the police as football hooligans on the rampage. My friend, comrade and fellow Red Poet Tim Richards has used this successfully on many occasions. I am not trying to be over-simplistic in equating last week's riots in England with Blair's Iraq debacle, but I am picking up on an excellent point made by an Iranian-born rapper on Newsnight last week, where he argued that the rioters were merely following the example set by the upper echelons of society. He said that looters were behaving just like countries, who invade in order in take what they want (oil, in the case of Iraq). Of course, such parallels are fundamental to any understanding and both Cameron and Miliband have stressed that the whole of society must take responsibility, even as they demonise the rioters while excusing the war, even as they allow the likes of Michael Gove to pay back money for goods acquired on expenses, whilst jailing one woman who simply received a pair of stolen shorts and actually slept through the riots! There is, in short, a marked disparity between grand statements about collective guilt and their actions. The incident which sparked the initial riots in Tottenham - the police shooting of Mark Duggan - will be dealt with in due course ( whenever that is!). Yet if the police involved had been instantly suspended on discovering that he hadn't fired a bullet and was almost certainly executed on the streets, then Cameron would've been setting an example to the rest of society. Instead, the police are universally praised for their bravery at the same time as being criticised for a lack of robust tactics. What can be more 'robust' than killing a man in such a way? If the Norwegian police could detain Breivik in much more fraught circumstances, then why not Duggan? Bankers and tax evaders have long looted our society, playing on fear and greed in the international markets. Have they been punished in the retributive manner now being seen against so many rioters? No, they have been rescued by our taxes and rewarded by a resumption of the very bonus culture which caused the problems in the first place. The rank hypocrisy does not stop there. Why are no journalists confronting Boris Johnson and fellow ex-Bullingdon Club members Cameron and Osbourne with their own pasts, when they went on the rampage, wrecking pubs and restaurants in Oxford? There has been much speculation about the causes of the riots, but the malaise of capitalism hasn't often been raised. An exception was a fascinating article in the 'Independent' by Chumbawamba's Boff Whalley, who showed clearly that the word 'anarchy' had been much misused and abused by the tabloids. What happened in England's towns and cities was the antithesis of true anarchy, a state without leaders but with an order greated by a belief in the basic goodness of humanity. It was leaders who created the conditions which led to them : poverty, heavy-handed policing and stringent cuts. As the week's events unfolded it was very interesting to observe the changing use of language. They began as 'UK Riots' and then gradually the 'England Riots' became synonymous with British ones, as if England and Britain were interchangeable. Despite short and erroneous columns in the 'Guardian ' and 'Independent', they never happened in Wales. Why is this important matter not discussed in the Anglocentric media? I believe the reasons are as complex and manifold as those about the causes of England's Riots. After all, Gloucester and Bristol kicked off, yet not the more deprived cities of Cardiff and Swansea. Our levels of poverty and unemployment are undoubtedly greater than England, though both are more entrenched and we benefited a good deal less from the New Labour regime, so the shock of relative poverty isn't so recent. However, I genuinely think that , like Scotland, there are factors in our favour. With a comparatively new and gradually developing Senedd, we are witnessing a period of increasing self-confidence and the 'Yes' vote was indicative of that. The expenses scandal which rocked Westminster and created mass disillusionment with politicians affected Wales, but AM's have shown much more openess and affinity with the struggles of the people. Despite dire economic circumstances, this self-confidence has seeped downwards. Moreover, while the ConDem Gov. has illustrated its sheer callousness by abolishing EMA's, maintaining fanatical testing in schools and raising tuition fees, the governments in Cardiff Bay and Edinburgh have carried out Social Democratic policies which showed they did care about young people : refusing to get rid of EMA's, insisting on an education system without 'exam factories' and divisive Academies and not raising tuition fees. Of course, many are totally alienated in Cymru : they don't vote because no parties represent their interests or alter their lives. Youth unemployement is rife and growing rapidly. Yet, especially in the Valleys, a semblance of community does remain. Despite it all, there's a fierce sense of belonging, reinforced by the static nature of those towns and villages over the last few decades. I've merely touched upon the reasons why we avoided the riots of last week, but I believe that our education system, more caring government and sense of hope against the odds are just some.